News:

In keeping a positive experience for our disc golf community, we reserve the right to take down photos, comments and other material deemed "unproductive,” by the KCFDC. This includes, but is not limited to, vulgar language, disturbing photos, angry or aggressive behavior toward fellow members and posting anything in violation of any intellectual property right of another. If someone persists in offensive behavior or continually violates any of our house rules, we may block that person from further participation. So please, just remember to respect everyone here and on the course.

coops

The Chastity Belt.. It's unproportional to the rest of the basket. It's like the basket has a bad case of Muffin Top. it''s my opinion but yes, but they are distracting

I don't buy all that visual pollution malarkey. That just seems like folks that don't want baskets of any kind there in the first place

That's my stance as well-- I don't much care about the park aesthetics argument. Legacy and PC are both fine looking parks even if they have Discatchers, and those baskets aren't taking anything away from that. The sheetmetal band makes the Discatcher not look like every other basket out there, or unlike how a disc golf basket is supposed to look, IMO. That's why I find it distracting. Even if they catch a little better, it isn't such a drastic improvement to warrant having that ugly sheetmetal band on there. Hell, Cubby's basket catches better than any of the options listed in this poll, but we're not about to start using those either.

I understand the distraction aspect, though I don't agree with it. I get much more distracted when putting with wondering/hoping it will catch a good putt I throw. I can think of several times putting on Mach IIIs where I've put it right in the middle, softly, but was gapped on the outer chains and had the pole throw it back due to the inner chains sitting too close.

So, I guess to put it simply, distraction can and should be considered, but it shouldn't be exclusively a DISCatcher concern. Good putts that fall out are far more distracting.

Logged

coops

With regards to new courses, the decision on baskets is up to the person putting the course in and parks and rec department; end of story there. If you want a course with the new Innova baskets - find some acreage, get it approved, and put it in. I just don't really understand the point of this argument here. It's the song that never ends. It's pointless to argue equipment because there will NEVER be a time when everyone agrees.

I don't think the thread should be misunderstood as trying to get everyone to agree. It is about discussing the pros and cons of each basket so that we can better make informed decisions.

I also have a problem with the idea that it is up to the person putting in the course to choose what basket they want. Yes, if it is outside of a club or private land then sure, that makes sense. It doesn't here. If Jack is coordinating with the KCMO P&R to get new baskets at WW then it should be as a club representative, not as an individual. In that sense I would rather have someone who is an official within the club coordinating with them.

(Note: Before everyone jumps down my throat about that, it is an example. I don't know that that is what is happening here, but if it is it is problematic. Club courses should be cared for, maintained, and everything else with the club and the P&R.)

I've never found myself to be distracted by the basket color, people behind it or too close to me. I'm a big fan of the DISCatcher basket, but for some reason would not be a fan of them at WW. Any other course seems fine, but not WW. I think WW looks better with silver ones.

I also have a problem with the idea that it is up to the person putting in the course to choose what basket they want. Yes, if it is outside of a club or private land then sure, that makes sense. It doesn't here. If Jack is coordinating with the KCMO P&R to get new baskets at WW then it should be as a club representative, not as an individual. In that sense I would rather have someone who is an official within the club coordinating with them.

(Note: Before everyone jumps down my throat about that, it is an example. I don't know that that is what is happening here, but if it is it is problematic. Club courses should be cared for, maintained, and everything else with the club and the P&R.)

Person putting it in, club representative, whatever you want to call it. I'm just referring to the individual(s) who are working with the P&R to install the course. It's their call. If you want it to be a "club" decision, then you need to put that petition in front of the board/club and get a motion passed that any new "club" courses be approved by the club as a whole with regards to basket selection. As for me, I'm good with whatever basket is used. So long as we have another course to choose from, I'm happy!

coops

I think we're saying the same thing, Jordan. Most specifically I'm talking about the WW basket upgrade to happen. That way it is an existing club course.

There also shouldn't be any confusion about this point: there isn't too much that can go wrong with having baskets in a park. A Mach III is better than a Mach II is better than tree is better than an open field with nothing to throw at. There is, however, room to be discriminating and to try to make the best choice.

I've never found myself to be distracted by the basket color, people behind it or too close to me. I'm a big fan of the DISCatcher basket, but for some reason would not be a fan of them at WW. Any other course seems fine, but not WW. I think WW looks better with silver ones.

Maybe. I think the green DISCatchers at WW would be beautiful. Or we could get them a dull grey to make them have a similar look to the current ones. I just don't think aesthetics should get in the way of having the best catching baskets at our most popular and heavily-played course.

I think we're saying the same thing, Jordan. Most specifically I'm talking about the WW basket upgrade to happen. That way it is an existing club course...... I think the green DISCatchers at WW would be beautiful. Or we could get them a dull grey to make them have a similar look to the current ones. I just don't think aesthetics should get in the way of having the best catching baskets at our most popular and heavily-played course.

So now though this should be your decision? Or are you just saying that if you had your way?

coops

I think we're saying the same thing, Jordan. Most specifically I'm talking about the WW basket upgrade to happen. That way it is an existing club course...... I think the green DISCatchers at WW would be beautiful. Or we could get them a dull grey to make them have a similar look to the current ones. I just don't think aesthetics should get in the way of having the best catching baskets at our most popular and heavily-played course.

So now though this should be your decision? Or are you just saying that if you had your way?

Yes, Jack, that is exactly what I'm saying. With your help of snipping my quote and moving things around it has become clear to me that what I actually want is for things to go my way all the time, regardless of reason or logic. *sarcasm over*

What, may I ask, is so offensive to having an opinion, asking others' opinion, and arguing for something that I believe? I think DISCatchers catch the best and I think a solid second choice is the Mach V. (Could be Titan, but having only used the portable, again, I will refrain from making a judgment.) The Mach III is a traditional decision based on some sort of loyalty to the past that I don't understand and that hasn't been clearly communicated. Yes, it is championship approved by the PDGA, but that doesn't mean that it is equal to all other choices. Making that argument is like saying a Discraft Ultrastar and Nuke go the same distance because they are both PDGA approved for golf.

As to the point of this being entirely a subjective issue, can we please put that to rest? I'll list some points to prove that it doesn't make any sense.

Arguments against Mach III:1. It doesn't catch as well (subjective)2. The inner chain assembly is too close to the pole (objective)3. There are only inner and outer chains (objective)4. The top of the chain assembly has large gaps allowing the disc to get to the pole more frequently (objective)5. The nickel can knock high putts down but doesn't have an equal cross-section and thus can unfairly reward some bad putts (objective)6. The nickel can severely damage a putter (objective)

Arguments for Mach III:1. Tradition (objective)2. They catch just as well (subjective)3. They don't visually pollute (subjective)I really can't think of any more. I've asked many times and no one seems to offer any more.

Arguments against DISCatcher:1. The chastity belt is distracting (subjective)2. They rust (subjective and anecdotal) *plus according most this issue has been resolved3. Visual pollution (subjective)

Arguments for the DISCatcher:1. The top band makes the top of the chain array more uniform and decreases risk of bad putts going in or good putts going out (objective)2. They catch better (subjective)3. Three sets of chains (objective)4. More chains (objective)5. Getting another color can add character and decrease visual pollution (subjective)

These are the most important arguments. Many are objective and should be weighed more heavily. Subjective, while not always quantifiable, can still be debated. We should try to keep the discussion substantive and to refrain from ad hominem attacks.

The basket that is in the park is the best basket. Everyone has there preference but unless PDGA sets a gold standard on basket all are ok, not all bowling are greased the same with same grease, kind of a cool part of the game. In columbia i feel its part of the challenge on the top course when the best putts spit out.